[uf-discuss] [hcite] date-published

Michael McCracken michael.mccracken at gmail.com
Tue Feb 20 12:27:04 PST 2007

>From Bruce D'Arcus on the wiki:

"I've mentioned more than once that "date-published" is misleadingly
specific; too much for real world citations. Consider that many books
are published in the year preceding their copyright date, which is in
fact the date used for citation. I'd prefer just "date" and
"date-accessed" as a first cut. --Bruce 3 Feb 2007"

I agree - this maps well to current practice in existing formats I
know of - they tend to not specify the type of date, instead using
fields like "month" and "year".

Is anyone against changing 'date-published' to 'date'?

Michael McCracken
UCSD CSE PhD Candidate
research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/
misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list